Thinking strategically about intellectual property rights

Telecommunications Policy

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 201-211

  Drahos, Peter ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COUNTER PROPOSAL STRATEGY; ECONOMIC TRANSPARENCY STRATEGY; HARD LAW STRATEGY; INDEPENDENT UMPIRE STRATEGY; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION; LOOPHOLE STRATEGY; NONCOMPLIANCE STRATEGY; SOFT LAW STRATEGY;

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; INTERNATIONAL LAW; INTERNATIONAL TRADE; STANDARDS; STRATEGIC PLANNING; TELECOMMUNICATION CONTROL;

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY;

EID: 0031125577     PISSN: 03085961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0308-5961(97)00002-5     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Both TRIPS and the WTO Treaty are part of the Final Act Embodying The Results Of The Uruguay Round Of Multilateral Trade Negotiations which was concluded at Marrakesh, 15 April 1994.
2. Drahos, P 'Global law reform and rent-seeking: the case of intellectual property' Australian Journal of Corporate Law 1996 7 45-61
3. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
4. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
5. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
6. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
7. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
8. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
9. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
10. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
11. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
12. The literature is large. For early important work, see F Machlup 'An Economic Review of the Patent System' (Study No. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate, 85th Congress, Washington, DC 1958); Penrose, E T 'International Patenting and the Less-Developed Countries' Economic Journal 1973 83 766; Väyrynen, R 'International patenting as a means of technological dominance' International Social Science Journal, 1978 20 315. For a synthesis of much of the literature see Oddi, A S 'The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth?' Duke Law Journal 1987 831 ; Nogués, J 'Patents and pharmaceutical drugs: understanding the presures on developing countries' Journal of World Trade 1990 24 81. For a discussion of patents in the context of trade and technology policy see Lyons, B 'International trade and technology policy' in Dasgupta P and Stoneman P (eds) Economic Policy and Technological Performance Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987) 169-205; Subramanian, A 'The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis' World Development 1991 19 945-956. For an example of literature that deals with the impact of the patent system on a medium sized country, see The Economic Implications Of Patents In Australia, Australian Patent Office, Canberra, 1981; Industrial Property Advisory Committee, Patents, Innovation And Competition In Australia, Australia 1984. For a recent critical discussion of intellectual property see Lamberton, D 'Innovation and intellectual property' in Dodgson, M and Rothwell, R (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation Elgar, Aldershot (1994) 301-309.
13. Keayla, B K 'New Patent Regime: Implications for Domestic Industry, Research and Development and Consumers' National Working Group on Patent Laws, 1996. See also 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: Implications for Industry and R and D', Proceedings Of The 9th National Conference On In-House R & D In Industry, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India, New Delhi, May 1996.
14. Keayla, B K 'New Patent Regime: Implications for Domestic Industry, Research and Development and Consumers' National Working Group on Patent Laws, 1996. See also 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: Implications for Industry and R and D', Proceedings Of The 9th National Conference On In-House R & D In Industry, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India, New Delhi, May 1996.
15. See Dubey, Muchkund An Unequal Treaty, New Age International Limited, New Delhi, 1996; Krishna Iyer, V R, Chinnappa Reddy, O, Desai, D A, Sachar, Rajinder Peoples' Commission On GATT, Centre for Study of Global Trade System and Development, New Delhi, 1996; Keayla, B K 'New Patent Regime: Implications for Domestic Industry, Research and Development and Consumers' National Working Group on Patent Laws, 1996; Keayla, SBK 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: An Overview' in 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: Implications for Industry and R & D', Proceedings of the 9th National Conference on in-house R & D in Industry, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India, New Delhi, May 1996, 67-79.
16. See Dubey, Muchkund An Unequal Treaty, New Age International Limited, New Delhi, 1996; Krishna Iyer, V R, Chinnappa Reddy, O, Desai, D A, Sachar, Rajinder Peoples' Commission On GATT, Centre for Study of Global Trade System and Development, New Delhi, 1996; Keayla, B K 'New Patent Regime: Implications for Domestic Industry, Research and Development and Consumers' National Working Group on Patent Laws, 1996; Keayla, SBK 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: An Overview' in 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: Implications for Industry and R & D', Proceedings of the 9th National Conference on in-house R & D in Industry, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India, New Delhi, May 1996, 67-79.
17. See Dubey, Muchkund An Unequal Treaty, New Age International Limited, New Delhi, 1996; Krishna Iyer, V R, Chinnappa Reddy, O, Desai, D A, Sachar, Rajinder Peoples' Commission On GATT, Centre for Study of Global Trade System and Development, New Delhi, 1996; Keayla, B K 'New Patent Regime: Implications for Domestic Industry, Research and Development and Consumers' National Working Group on Patent Laws, 1996; Keayla, SBK 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: An Overview' in 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: Implications for Industry and R & D', Proceedings of the 9th National Conference on in-house R & D in Industry, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India, New Delhi, May 1996, 67-79.
18. See Dubey, Muchkund An Unequal Treaty, New Age International Limited, New Delhi, 1996; Krishna Iyer, V R, Chinnappa Reddy, O, Desai, D A, Sachar, Rajinder Peoples' Commission On GATT, Centre for Study of Global Trade System and Development, New Delhi, 1996; Keayla, B K 'New Patent Regime: Implications for Domestic Industry, Research and Development and Consumers' National Working Group on Patent Laws, 1996; Keayla, SBK 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: An Overview' in 'The New Intellectual Property Regime: Implications for Industry and R & D', Proceedings of the 9th National Conference on in-house R & D in Industry, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India, New Delhi, May 1996, 67-79.
19. The Paris Convention refers to the Paris Convention For The Protection Of Industrial Property of 20 March 1883 as last revised at Stockholm on 14 July 1967 and amended in 1979. The Berne Convention refers to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works of 9 September 1886 as last revised at Paris on 24 July 1971 and amended in 1979.
20. Drahos, P. 'Global Property rights in information: The story of TRIPS at the GATT' Prometheus 1995 13 6-19
21. See article 34 of TRIPS.
22. Under the Paris Convention, states are free to determine criteria of patentability. See Bodenhausen, G H C Guide to the application of the Paris Convention For The Protection Of Industrial Property BIRPI, Geneva and Switzerland (1968), p. 15. Under article 27 of TRIPS states cannot exclude from patentability microorganisms and essentially non-biological and microbiological processes for the production of plants or animals.
23. See, for example, article 5(1) of the Berne Convention and article 2(1) of the Paris Convention.
24. For a critical discussion of this see David, P A 'Intellectual Property Institutions and the Panda's Thumb: Patents, Copyrights, and Trade Secrets in Economic Theory and History' in Wallerstein, M B, Mogee, M E and Schoen, R A (eds) Global Dimensions Of Intellectual Property Rights In Science And Technology National Academy Press, Washington and DC. (1993), 19-61.
25. In Australia, the economic evidence seems to suggest that Australia has nothing to gain in welfare terms from the globalization of intellectual property. See Industrial Property Advisory Committee, 'Patents, innovation and competition in Australia' Australia (1984); Bureau of Industry Economics, 'The economics of patents' Occasional Paper 18, AGPS, Canberra (1994); Office of Regulation Review, 'An Economic Analysis of Copyright Reform' Commonwealth of Australia (1995); Gruen, N, Prior, G, Bruce, I 'Extending patent life: is it in Australia's economic interests' Industry Commission, Staff Information Paper, June 1996.
26. In Australia, the economic evidence seems to suggest that Australia has nothing to gain in welfare terms from the globalization of intellectual property. See Industrial Property Advisory Committee, 'Patents, innovation and competition in Australia' Australia (1984); Bureau of Industry Economics, 'The economics of patents' Occasional Paper 18, AGPS, Canberra (1994); Office of Regulation Review, 'An Economic Analysis of Copyright Reform' Commonwealth of Australia (1995); Gruen, N, Prior, G, Bruce, I 'Extending patent life: is it in Australia's economic interests' Industry Commission, Staff Information Paper, June 1996.
27. In Australia, the economic evidence seems to suggest that Australia has nothing to gain in welfare terms from the globalization of intellectual property. See Industrial Property Advisory Committee, 'Patents, innovation and competition in Australia' Australia (1984); Bureau of Industry Economics, 'The economics of patents' Occasional Paper 18, AGPS, Canberra (1994); Office of Regulation Review, 'An Economic Analysis of Copyright Reform' Commonwealth of Australia (1995); Gruen, N, Prior, G, Bruce, I 'Extending patent life: is it in Australia's economic interests' Industry Commission, Staff Information Paper, June 1996.
28. In Australia, the economic evidence seems to suggest that Australia has nothing to gain in welfare terms from the globalization of intellectual property. See Industrial Property Advisory Committee, 'Patents, innovation and competition in Australia' Australia (1984); Bureau of Industry Economics, 'The economics of patents' Occasional Paper 18, AGPS, Canberra (1994); Office of Regulation Review, 'An Economic Analysis of Copyright Reform' Commonwealth of Australia (1995); Gruen, N, Prior, G, Bruce, I 'Extending patent life: is it in Australia's economic interests' Industry Commission, Staff Information Paper, June 1996.
29. For a discussion of international justice, see Beitz C R 'Political Theory and International Relations' Princeton, NJ (1979)
30. For a discussion of the issues, see Kloppenburg Jr, J R (ed) 'Seeds and Sovereignty: The Use and Control of Plant Genetic Resources' Duke University Press and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Durham and London (1988).
31. Section 18(2) of the Patents Act 1990 (Australia) declares that human beings and the biological processes for their generation are not patentable inventions. In 1996, a private member's bill to amend the Patents Act was introduced. Its purpose was to prevent the patenting of naturally occurring genes.
32. Krishna Iyer, V R, Chinnappa Reddy, O, Desai, D A, Sachar, Rajinder 'Peoples' Commission On GATT' Centre for Study of Global Trade System and Development, New Delhi (1996) 164.
33. These benefits are primarily in the agricultural sector. See Dubey Muchkund, 'An Unequal Treaty' New Age International Ltd and New Delhi (1996) 12.
34. Dubey, Muchkund 'An Unequal Treaty' New Age International Limited and New Delhi (1996) 135-136.
35. Johnstone, I 'Treaty interpretation: The authority of interpretive communities' Michigan Journal Of International Law 1991 12 371
36. Weil, P 'Towards relative normativity in international law' American Journal of International Law 1983 77 413
37. See the section on soft law in D'Amato, A (ed.) 'International Law Anthology' Anderson Publishing Co. (1994) 149-157.
38. Schachter, O 'Recent trends in international law making' The Australian Year Book of International Law, Faculty of Law, ANU, Canberra (1992) 12 1-15, 14.
39. The International Conference On TRIPS, MAI And Spread Of Global Dominance Of MNCS, organized by the Forum of Parliamentarians On Intellectual Property and National Working Group On Patent Laws, New Delhi, 14 and 15 November, 1996 culminated in a declaration.
40. Braithwaite, J 'A sociology of modeling and the politics of empowerment' British Journal of Sociology 1994 45 445-479
41. Tversky, A and Kahneman, D 'The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice' Science 1981 211 453-458
42. Fieldwork for project on global business regulation, funded by the National Science Foundation and the Australian Research Council.
43. On the impact of patents on the prices of drugs in India see Keayla, B K 'New Patent Regime: Implications for Domestic Industry, Research and Development and Consumers' National Working Group on Patent Laws 1996 21-22; For the impact of copyright on CD prices in Australia see Prices Surveillance Authority, Inquiry Into The Prices Of Sound Recordings, Australia (1990).
44. On the impact of patents on the prices of drugs in India see Keayla, B K 'New Patent Regime: Implications for Domestic Industry, Research and Development and Consumers' National Working Group on Patent Laws 1996 21-22; For the impact of copyright on CD prices in Australia see Prices Surveillance Authority, Inquiry Into The Prices Of Sound Recordings, Australia (1990).
45. On the link between intellectual property and communication see Drahos, P 'Decentring communication: the dark side of intellectual property' in Campbell T and Sadurski W (eds) Freedom Of Communication Dartmouth, Aldershot (1994).
46. See Love, J 'Patents vs People' Multinational Monitor, June 1994, Love, J P 'Background documents on health care and intellectual property rights', prepared for the international conference on TRIPS, MAI and spread of global dominance of MNCS, New Delhi, India, 14-15 November, 1996.
47. See Love, J 'Patents vs People' Multinational Monitor, June 1994, Love, J P 'Background documents on health care and intellectual property rights', prepared for the international conference on TRIPS, MAI and spread of global dominance of MNCS, New Delhi, India, 14-15 November, 1996.
48. See Bureau of Industry Economics, Working Paper 104, The Economics of Intellectual Property May 1995, 18-20.
49. Gruen, N, Prior, G and Bruce, I 'Extending patent life: is it in Australia's economic interests' Industry Commission, Staff Information Paper, June 1996.
50. See 'The Indispensable Trade Weapon: 301/Special 301' a commentary and appraisal by Jack Valenti, President and CEO. Motion Picture Association of America, Senate Finance Committee, Washington DC (1992). Under the US Trade Act of 1974 as amended the United States Trade Representative is authorized to take unilateral action against states which in some way act adversely to US intellectual property interests. These statutory processes are known as 'Regular 301', 'Special 301' and 'Super 301'. See Getlan, M 'TRIPs and the Future of Section 301: A Comparative Study in Trade Dispute Resolution' Columbia Journal Of Transnational Law 1995 34 173, 178-184.
51. See 'The Indispensable Trade Weapon: 301/Special 301' a commentary and appraisal by Jack Valenti, President and CEO. Motion Picture Association of America, Senate Finance Committee, Washington DC (1992). Under the US Trade Act of 1974 as amended the United States Trade Representative is authorized to take unilateral action against states which in some way act adversely to US intellectual property interests. These statutory processes are known as 'Regular 301', 'Special 301' and 'Super 301'. See Getlan, M 'TRIPs and the Future of Section 301: A Comparative Study in Trade Dispute Resolution' Columbia Journal Of Transnational Law 1995 34 173, 178-184.
52. See Hudec, R E 'Dispute Settlement' in Schott, J J (ed) 'Completing the Uruguay Round' Institute for International Economics, Washington DC (1990) 180, 198.
53. See Palmer, G 'The ICJ in the Asia Pacific Region' Australian and New Zealand Society of International Law, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting Australian National University, Canberra 1996 225-250.
54. See Shiva, V Protecting our Biological and Intellectual Heritage in the Age of Biopiracy Research Foundation for Science and Technology and Natural Resource Policy (1996).
55. A copy of the model law is contained in volume 10(2) of the Copyright Bulletin UNESCO (1976).
56. See paper by Xu Chao, Director, National Copyright Administration of China, 'Legal Protection for Folklore in China' given at the International Conference on Artistic and Cultural Expressions, Traditional Kowledge, and Protection Of Heritage, University of Queensland, Brisbane, 27-29 September 1996.
57. The Convention on Biological Diversity recognizes the interests of indigenous communities in their knowledge and practices and obliges members to act in ways which are consistent with those interests (see, for example, Articles 8(j) and 10(c)). Article 29 of the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples provides that indigenous peoples are entitled to the recognition of the full ownership, control and protection of their cultural and intellectual property. The TRIPS agreement does not preclude states from creating sui generis schemes of protection for indigenous knowledge, since this subject matter falls outside of the scope of the agreement. Moreover, article 27 of TRIPS explicitly recognizes the right of states to create a sui generis system for plant varieties.